Almost half the stimulus would come from tax cuts, which include an extension of a two-percentage-point reduction in the payroll tax paid by workers due to expire Dec. 31 and a new decrease in the portion of the tax paid by employers.

It's big enough to upset Tea Party types, but not big enough to impress his lefty critics. I think the President's reelection strategy is to be really rather dull and middling... and to count on the other side looking extreme.

Now, wait a minute; I've been told by Alpha Liberal and everyone else who voted for this stupid son-of-a-bitch that tax cuts don't stimulate the economy.

It just lets fat cats stuff more of their money under the floor boards of their Bentleys.

And this, on the heels of Obama's rescinding the new ozone standards, due to the dismal jobs report. It's almost as though Obama thinks more environmental regulations destroy jobs. Again, I'm confused. Alpha, can you explain this to me? Garage?

He must realize that this will continue to cut the lefty critique of W off at the knees. The common lefty wisdom is that W caused our huge deficit with his tax cuts, that his tax cuts hurt the economy (in some unspecified way), and that the only way to help the economy is for the government to spend.

W's tax cuts directly preceded the 2002-2003 recession. If tax cuts stimulate a recession economy then W can claim (like O today) to have saved the U.S. from some far worse economic calamity.

Hell, I say give it to him. It won't work, but then he won't be able to blame the Republicans in the campaign. There is nothing more important than getting this guy out of office. Compared to that, $300B is chump change given our current fiscal mess.

The gun is down to it's last round, the bear is still coming having ignored all the rounds already fired. He can feel it's breath on his face as it prepares to chomp him like a Trisket. He aims, hand shaking, closes his eyes, and pop.

"MadisonMan said...Does aid to states just encourage putting off difficult cuts in places where trimming or efficiency is sorely needed?" Did last time. The lefties here in WI were singing "Happy Days are Here Again"

I will add that all this discussion about infrastructure spending seems to ignore the fact that the government -- at all levels -- is spending buckets of money on infrastructure already. Look up the budgets.

The payroll tax is an idiotic, regressive, albatross around the economy's neck and should be done away with. BUT, please, no more tax cuts. Let's accept the crappy system we have and do nothing for a while. We're in enough debt already. I am not interested in deficit reduction plans that start far off in the future when all's well:

Armed with wealth andThe best of health In the future when all’s wellI will lie down and be counted In the future when all’s well

AJ, I'm not sure why moving money from some people putting gas in their cars to others digging holes (and filling in adjacent holes) along the highway would stimulate shit.

Here are a few ideas:

Eliminate the minimum wage.

Make the entire fucking US a "right to work" zone.

Do away entirely with the NLRB, and rescind the NLRA.

Gut EPA and OSHA.

Cut corporate taxes, and personal taxes on S corps, in half.

Limit unemployment benefits to a more reasonable length of time than nearly 2 years. This seems harsh, but if you subsidize an activity, you get more of it -- it's an economic truism, and it applies to the activity of "not having a job" just as surely as it does to growing corn. Speaking of which:

What he's disinclined to do is to stimulate the private sector by lessening/simplifying the burden of government control. If he had done this is 2009, instead of going the other direction, we would be talking about robust economic growth and his great re-election prospects.

Pastafarian has it right....Year after year more rules pile up in the Federal Register. It's no fun and all risk trying to run a business when you have to interface with lawyers every day seeking their opinion on some stupid rule. Much easier to do nothing, if you can afford it. Pathetic but true.

No cutting taxes and regulations does. Cutting spending is mandated by the fiscal disaster that current and past spending has created. Some people think you cure that with more spending. If only Obama could do a short sale or get a refinance, maybe take out some cash from equity. Then we could buy that windmill for the patio.

The only way for Obama to create a business-friendly environment that would create jobs would be for him to completely repudiate everything he has done over the past 2-1/2 years, which he has neither the wisdom nor the will to do. It would go against everything he believes in.

Unless he does a 180 degree turn, the economy does not get better and he is The One and Done. If he DOES do a 180 degree turn, his base goes up in flames and he probably faces a primary challenge. Call it Catch-2012.

"The Republican leadership needs to learn that its job is not to work with this guy...."

Thisis nothing they need to learn...it's instinctive with this obstructivist bunch...they dug in their heels on offering implacable opposition to Obama before he was even sworn in.

Unfortunately, it is his resolutely Republican-ish policies that are helping destroy our country. If he had an "R" after his name for party affiliation, the Republicans would be supporting him wholeheartedly in his endeavors. After all, they, like he, are servile minions of Wall Street and the financial elites.

"The only way for Obama to create a business-friendly environment that would create jobs would be for him to..."

...continue to destroy the economy and the jobs picture such that Americans will rush like starving dogs toward jobs paying minimum wage or below, and with no benefits.

This is what business wants and they won't hire Americans until our prevailing wages are on par with (or below) that of the countries around the world where they currently employ labor at cents on the American dollar.

This is what business wants and they won't hire Americans until our prevailing wages are on par with (or below) that of the countries around the world where they currently employ labor at cents on the American dollar.

Now, you've described a reality, Kookie, although you did it in the most stupid way possible. Let me rephrase it: Technology has made it possible for an Indian software developer to compete directly with a U.S. software developer for any particular project.

If we really want long-term economic viability, then another thing that is crucial is an complete overhaul of the administrative law system. Not merely eliminating a couple of agencies here and there, or repealing certain legislation, like the Endangered Species Act, which is used to kill millions of jobs and development in order to "save" a worm or insect, but repealing entirely, or severely cutting back, the power of agencies to write rules and enforce regulations, and the consequential power of the courts to back them up.

Best part of the NY times article: sources weren't ready to commit to all the specifics because there were still negotiations and discussions going on. This "big" and "important", "substantive" speech announced weeks ago is being made up as he goes along. Any minutia that still needs to be negotiated and discussed at this point is...pointless.

It's like trying to decide whether to put dijon mustard or honey mustard on your turd sandwich. Either way, you get the same sandwich.

The White House is in the midst of rebranding the president as a pragmatic problem solver prepared to set aside ideology to address a compelling need (see last week’s concession on ozone regulations), a reasonable man in an era dominated by extreme views.

"Rebranding"? Weren't they already supposed to have branded the President as a pragmatist in 2008?

In any case, demonstrating the President's pragmatism is going to take more than talk. Let's see the President squash the NLRB's Boeing decision, send the agreed-upon FTA's to Congress, and restore the oil and gas exploration permit process. Then the White House wise men will have some actual evidence that the President can be pragmatic.

continue to destroy the economy and the jobs picture such that Americans will rush like starving dogs toward jobs paying minimum wage or below, and with no benefits.

I actually find this a very interesting statement because 1 theme of the Left has been we're not special, we're no more important than anyone else. We're not exceptional.

The googoos of the environmental movement have made damm sure they don't compete with us by piling on rules, regs, etc.

So now Teh One is taking us to the mean, why is there an issue?

We are not special. We've had it too good for far too long, we need to be brought down a peg or 3. Capitalism gave us the opportunity to do better, provide more to the world, you want it killed, everyone's equally miserable.

This is what you want. Why aren't you happy? This is what socialism does. It's nothing more than the old world way dressed up in fancy lingo.

I suspect a lot of businesspeople that at one time would have ranked "tax cuts" at the top of the list of things to improve economic growth would now put eliminate stupid regulations at the top. Overregulation is an insidious form of big corporatism. Small guys can't afford to keep up, big guys win.

they dug in their heels on offering implacable opposition to Obama before he was even sworn in.

IIRC, Obama's party had large majorities in both houses of Congress at the start of his term. It wasn't Republican opposition to Obama that ruined him, it was the fact that neither he nor Pelosi nor Reid paid any attention to any criticisms leveled against their job-killing plans.

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)The current front page of Drudge is Obama with a screaming black woman, I suppose implying the welfare queen bonanza of Obama's spending. Conservatives: keeping it classy since the Goldwater campaign

Your “take” says a lot about you, Franglo…psycho-babble that “proves” your opponent is a racist….I say you just take the “son of b!tches out” because that says classy.

Obama also is expected to continue for one year a tax break for businesses that allows them to deduct the full value of new equipment. The president and Congress negotiated that provision into law for 2011 last December

If he had an "R" after his name for party affiliation, the Republicans would be supporting him wholeheartedly in his endeavors.

When you point this out, it seems like they dig in their heels and believe it even less. As if corporate Democrats don't exist, even when they vote alongside Republicans. What I could never figure out is, if we continue to squeeze every last nickel from the working class, how do they in turn expect them to buy their products?

Optimism among small business owners remained flat at 48% in August after a sharp 20% downturn between June and July. The survey reflects the perspective of 35,000 of SurePayroll's small business customers, which all have 100 employees or less.

"Historically the optimism numbers are 80-90%, of small business owners optimistic about the future," says Micahel Alter, CEO of SurePayroll. "By definition you do not start a small business unless you believe you can overcome tough odds, so to have this down in the 40s is about as low as it goes and is really as low as we've seen"

Two main issues are the root of the pessimism:

1) Small business owners can't grow their businesses due to a lack of demand.

2) And for those small businesses that do want to grow, they cannot find funding.

"A lot of people are pessimistic because they do not see the revenues and those that want to be optimistic can't figure out how to grow," says Alter. "They are trying to figure out what they can do and how they survive bumping along the bottom even if there is a cliff."

Just like the rest of us, small business owners have lost faith in any sort of government solution to the country's economic problems. Herein lies the real concern. "Small businesses are the ones that have traditionally grown us out of every recession we've had," says Alter. If this pessimism persists, it seems the country could be in this economic downturn for the foreseeable future.

Note that with this increased spending, it is Obama's intention to also increase the annual budget baseline, just as the spending baseline was increased by $800 billion with the fraudulently-named "stimulus" bill, such that we now have trillion-dollar annual deficits as far as the eye can see.

What are the odds of Obama showing up at the podium on time? He's kept he press waiting for the better part of an hour in most of his recent speeches. An empty podium while the clock ticks toward the NFL game would enrage a whole lot of apolitical Americans. Don't fuck with football.

"I think the President's reelection strategy is to be really rather dull and middling..."

I think it's his strategy to pay off his various critics. The Chicago Way sees governing as being inherently about corruption. Pay off one side through tax cuts, pay off the other side through government pork. Throw money at them, and they'll free you to do whatever you want.

If they don't take the bribe, you destroy them.

That's pretty much how he has governed so far.

Fortunately, we reign in the power of our President to keep this from being too extreme. If left to his druthers, I have absolutely no doubt Obama would like to be the Norteamericano Chavez. The caudillo impulse is strong in him.

Yup. Obama's not taking a turn over the cliff! But if the Tea Party wants to go there ??? They're not his voters!

And, in politics, you go where the votes are!

You also have what's coming on September 29th. Where Merkel is betting she's surrounded by cowards who don't want another round of parliamentary elections. Sure. Some of her scoundrels will peel off. But then she picks up 20 among her greens and socialists. BE FUNNY IF THEY TURN HER DOWN!

The Euro? It should never have been started! Europe has worse problems then US. And, we even beat back global warming ... And, obama pulled the rug out from under the EPA.

Sure. Once the press staked out a position of hating Dubya. And, McCain, who couldn't believe whites would vote for a black man ... Made a discovery.

People as a general rule don't want to hate obama.

Add to this your bigger stain is dubya's legacy ... And, you start to see that obama is doggedly seeking re-election. It's not a religious experience.

Wow! A temporary FICA tax reduction! Great news for the beer, junk food and smokes industries! I'm going to rush out right now and buy stock in those industries. Does this Harvard educated idiot really think that business is just going to rush out and hire people just because they to will get a temporary reduction in their portion of the FICA tax? Yes indeed I'm going to hire several more employees just because of that FICA break. That dude is smoking more than cigarettes if he believes that.

In the meantime we just need to keep burying our kids and grandkids into further debt oblivion just to support useless government drones. Brilliant. What would we do without him?

Robert Cook: Jeez Bob! Chill! I'm to right of Genghis Khan and I don't even dislike him as much as you do today.

New President Zero Motto: "When you find yourself at the bottom of a hole, keep digging! Just dig a little more slowly."

$300 billion seems almost trivial compared to the failed "stimulus" we've already blown. But it seems like a lot of money to pile on the debt we have already accumulated -- without any positive effect, I might add.

Small business isn't hiring because:1) Demand for their products is way down.2) Government regulation (including looming Obamacare)

The first step in job growth is to:

1) Get the government off the backs of private employers.2) Place disincentives to outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries.3) Abolish the FED and print sovereign money free of debt.

Unfortunately those things will never be done.

Extensions of a payroll tax cut, that has already has done nothing, will do nothing.

Throwing money at "infrastructure" has done nothing, and will continue to do so.

The only peolple being helped are the Bankers who finance the added deficit, whom we the people pay interest to.

Imagine, the very scumbags Central Bankers who caused the entire meltdown are the ones being handed Trillions. Those same Central Bankers are the ones who installed the Usurper (born British of a British subject father-- not natural born). Why do you think that NOT ONE of those treasonous bastards has gone to jail?

Debt Saturation has already been reached. That means that every dollar added by government takes away from the economy rather than adds to it (because of the interest paid on the total debt, and also added taxes paid funding that debt).

Presently, every dollar added to debt takes away 15 Cents from the economy, so this $300 Billion in additional debt will actually take away $40.5 Billion from the economy.

I think the President's reelection strategy is to be really rather dull and middling... and to count on the other side looking extreme.

I've concluded that Obama isn't very bright. He needs others to tell him what to say and how to think. He is dull and middling, but that won't make the other side look extreme; it will make it look smarter.

I can only assume that the Small Pathetic Voice thought it had a point and that it had made it…the rest of us just wonder “What the H3ll did it mean by THAT?” Next to followed by obscene, and poorly articulated Spanglish….

Drinking Strychnine has an “effect” Garage…just not a GOOD effect. And NO, most studies don’ts how any real effect, UNLESS you count in a “multiplier effect.” So the studies don’t measure what IS, but what SHOULD be…e.g. “1 Billion dollars in stimulus should have a 1.34 multiplier effect, and therefore the GDP ought to be increased by $1.34 Billion.” The FIELD research about what actually happened is not clear at all….further as much of the “stimulus” went to fill state and local budget shortfalls it wasn’t particularly “stimulative”. Lastly, unlike a “study” let’s just note that unemployment ROSE after the passage and has not fallen since its passage…so in Paul Krugman’s HEAD it worked, but out on Main Street not so much. But thank you for contributing and serving as a sounding board and “straight man” for the wingers.

"... When you point this out, it seems like they dig in their heels and believe it even less..."

Gee do you garage? I ask because you strap on the knee pads for Obama any chance you get on this forum. If hes so Republican does that mean you'll hold hands with Cook and vote for Nader or whoever manages to get on the socialist ticket?Or is the letter behind the name the only qualifier you need?

"What I could never figure out is, if we continue to squeeze every last nickel from the working class, how do they in turn expect them to buy their products?"

I don't think they've necessarily thought it through. I think they're focused only on shoring up their profits by shrinking their costs however they may, particularly labor costs--except for the princelings who run the companies and who make more in a year than most people on earth will earn in their entire lives--and they may assume we'll all continue buying their products on credit. Or they may assume "emerging markets" elsewhere in the world will make up for shrinking markets domestically. Or they may be well aware there will come a screeching collapse at some point, and their only goal is to make hay while the sun shines, to purloin a phrase.

This is the irrationality of unhindered capitalism and of greed...it functions as it will until it crashes, as would a car or train set on course and then abandoned by the drivers.

Or they may be well aware there will come a screeching collapse at some point, and their only goal is to make hay while the sun shines, to purloin a phrase.

Unfortunately I think this is it. Or, maybe their just dusting off the Banker Manifesto:

"Capital must protect itself in every way, through combination and through legislation. Debts must be collected and loans and mortgages foreclosed as soon as possible. When through a process of law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and more easily governed by the strong arm of the law applied by the central power of wealth, under control of leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principle men now engaged in forming an IMPERIALISM of capital to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd. Thus by discrete action we can secure for ourselves what has been generally planned and successfully accomplished."

I mean couldn't it just be a woman genuinely happy to see her President? The man who she supports and loves and is excited to see and wants to cheer?

Why do you have to make it racial. I don't know that woman's story. She might be an elected offical for all I know. Why make such a bigoted assumption. Not all black people are on welfare you know. Just sayn'

I realize your fallback position is the specter of companies sticking it to consumers by "shoring up profits" which is equal nonsense, thanks to the competition and elasticity inherent in the system you decry.

Wow "Franglo" aka Raul aka Byro's back with some cutting-edge crypto- Romneyite brainfarts. (Ahouse non-conservatives--don't mistake this yokel for a prog./demo. He's not, anymore than the rest of the Ahouse glibertarians)

The Franglo-Raul hype--change/derail the discussion from economics into his little stupid drama of the day, with the usual stupid emotional language. Typical ratfink pseudo-liberal (and Franglo's the racist, LDS, white trash all the way. Right Byro Anglonius)

henry, you never heard of the Banker Manifesto? Charles Lindbergh, early 1900s. Could be written today:

"We (the bankers) must proceed with caution and guard every move made, for the lower order of people are already showing signs of restless commotion. Prudence will therefore show a policy of apparently yielding to the popular will until our plans are so far consummated that we can declare our designs without fear of any organized resistance. The Farmers Alliance and Knights of Labor organizations in the United States should be carefully watched by our trusted men, and we must take immediate steps to control these organizations in our interest or disrupt them.

Over the Labor Day weekend, I went to a number of events in the Hamptons. At all of them, Obama was discussed. At none of them — that’s none — was he defended. That was remarkable. After all, sitting around various lunch and dinner tables were mostly Democrats. Not only that, some of them had been vociferous Obama supporters, giving time and money to his election effort. They were all disillusioned.

This is the irrationality of unhindered capitalism and of greed...it functions as it will until it crashes, as would a car or train set on course and then abandoned by the drivers.

Yes, and the rightist-free-market champions do not ever question their supply side dogma--fewer regs, lower taxes, less programs and planning --even as the system crashes in their faces. Most of them are convinced their ticket to the Limbaugh-Kochs yacht party will be arriving in the mail any day soon. Tea-chimp consciousness.

Isn't the role of government to supply and maintain infrastructure? Why is it suddenly an extra?

This is a very un-bold initiative, very tame, very unimaginative.

I would sell naming rights to the national parks, paint the Hoover Dam with logos, sell Nike the right to paint the lines down our roads with their logo, sell the US Postal service at auction, compel every person over 21 to pay, PAY, at least $100 dollars a year in taxes. I would propose reducing the corporate tax rate to a rate equal to the lowest of any first world country. I would extend the date of SS eligibility to age 70 for all under the age of 50. I would means test Medicare.

Revealed by US Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. from Minnesota before the US Congress sometime during his term of office between the years of 1907 and 1917 to warn the citizens

Wow, that’s what you got…a statement “revealed” sometime between 1907 and 1917? Geeeeeez, next you’ll be quoting Alex Jones. Have you checked out he Bildabergers and the Bohemian Grove People yet as well, Garage?

"The NBC affiliate in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, WTMJ TV announced yesterday they will not be airing Obama's jobs speech at 7 PM EST Thursday night. instead they are opting for their own pre-game coverage of the Packers Saints game scheduled to kick off at 8 PM. Green Bay's NBC affiliate, NBC 26, will also go with the Packers pre-game show over Obama."

Garage, when Cooke is doing a better job it’s time to call it a day….Cookie may be some kind of Stalinist, but at least he isn’t wandering around in Fantasy Manifesto Land to “prove” his points…Here’s some good advice: I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over

I don't know franglo, is the picture supposed to have a meaning? Sometimes a photo is just a photo. I see Obama surrounded by a bunch of devoted followers, one of which is a woman obviously in the throes of ectsasy at being in such close proximity of The One.

There were tons of these kinds if pictures circulating for the last couple years so why you think this particular one is racist is beyond me.

Freder is right. There is zero waste in infrastructure spending. Rich people don't hire, only poor people and the government. The higher the tax rate, the stronger the economy. Fire doesn't melt steel, I'm from the governent and am here to help you. There are no American tanks in Baghdad.

This is the irrationality of unhindered capitalism and of greed...it functions as it will until it crashes, as would a car or train set on course and then abandoned by the drivers.

This is why the Left is so retarded.

People who support capitalism have no desire to impoverish anybody. As you both mention--it makes no sense.

But that is the mindset you're stuck in when you think the economy and wealth are static values. In that scheme, one man gets poorer as another gets richer. You hear this all the time when a liberal talks about income unfairness--as if a well-paid hedge fund manager is literally stealing from a factory worker.

Of course business owners want customers to have wealth and lots of spending money. But the way to get there is not by handing out lots of free money or running an "ungreedy" business where you undersell your own product out of the goodness of your heart. It may make you feel good, but no good will come out of it in the end.

J: I rather like your take on economics. should we bundle your suggestions and send them to our president? Just those on this thread that are filled with your own original ideas. Or do you prefer to be the critic, the guy who sees what is wrong here and there. That, my poor fellow, is a talent that is not rare. You are a lightweight on stilts.

It is funny that when a Republican cuts taxes the Right jumps in to cheer and defend him. When a Democrat does it it is called "stimulus" and is by definition bad and leads to, wait for it, deficits!! Bad, dog. It would be more convincing if when Bush "stimulated" the economy in 2001-2003 the same "Tea Party" types would have objected. And objected to the "stimulus" being extended to 2012. But alas, politics has intervened and tax cuts (stimulus) is defined more by who is doing it than by its end result.

U’uuuum Pragmatist, he’s a hint…Obama didn’t CUT TAXES, he offered TAX CREDITS….A tax cut means you pay a lower RATE, period, whether you make solar panels or blow-up dolls. A CREDIT is where you do something that the government likes and they reduce, temporarily, your taxes…..

So No, Obama hasn’t offered tax cuts, at least in his Porkulus Bill…..now Bush offered cuts, but remember they are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG and the Obama Posse constantly talks about BUSH’S Tax Cuts…so which is it, Obama’s Tax Cuts (For the Wealthy) or Bush’s Tax Cuts? Let’s get the story straight.

"It would be more convincing if when Bush 'stimulated' the economy in 2001-2003 the same 'Tea Party' types would have objected.

So your position is that if one doesn't object to a policy when it is implemented, one can never object to it in later days? I'd love to hold the Party of Slavery to that standard.

And as far as objecting, look up "Porkbusters." If you've never head of them, I'm not surprised. It's hard to hear anything when you stick your fingers in your ears and keep screaming "BUSHLIEDPEOPLEDIED!" over and over.

And honestly Freder, IF the Federal Government is paying for the street repaving, it’s subject to Davis-Bacon, meaning that the re-paving costs more than it ought to, due to the “prevailing wage” provisions of the Act. Paying MORE to repave my street than it ought to cost is not stimulating the economy; it’s wasting money.

So rather than pay the labourers $20/hour rather than the customary $10/hour let’s just agree to BURN the difference on the job site, as it will have the same economic effect as over-paying by $10/hour.

It is funny that when a Republican cuts taxes the Right jumps in to cheer and defend him. When a Democrat does it it is called "stimulus" and is by definition bad and leads to, wait for it, deficits!!

I'm not criticizing tax cuts at all. I'm just amused because the Left can't figure out what it thinks about taxes. If you go elsewhere and read, most liberals seem to think that raising taxes will help the economy. At various points this Administration has gone either way-- raise taxes, lower taxes --and at each turn it thinks it's helping the economy. Amazing!

$300 billion into the economy, in one year, which happens to be next year. What's next year? 2012. What happens toward the end of 2012? Oh yeah, an election. $300 billion in one year represents 2% of GDP--meaning growth for the year will be inflated 2%.

Can I be forgiven for thinking this desperate attempt at "saving the economy" three years after Obama was elected is just a cynical attempt at getting himself re-elected? As though spending $1 billion on his election isn't enough, he also wants a $300 billion prop to seal the deal.

Reading Cookie responding to garage responding to franglo is hysterical. It's a regular liberal circle jerk, just like the liberal circle jerks that take place in the Sunday morning "news" ghetto on Meet The Depressed and Slay The Nation.